Wheelabrator has run two full page advertisements promoting the incinerator project which they call a trash to energy project which will include recycling, composting and a new landfill. But they promise a 90% reduction of trash volume which will come from the incinerator. It will cost every homeowner almost $100 per year to build the new plant, states WMX. (PCN - March 16 & 17, 1998).
Four "resident who care" also placed a full page ad in PCN (March 1, 1998) laying out their focus on solutions. The present Ordot dump is listed as one of the top 100 Superfund sites in the US, they write. They also report that arguments have been made that the incinerator will take up less room on the thirty by ten mile island. These four present themselves as somewhat nonpartisan but they appear to support the project. Opposition comes from the residents and university personnel who's cause Senator Santos is presently representing.
The proposed incinerator raises the dangers to Guam's 140,000 residents which includes 20,000 US military and dependents. Opposition rises from the danger of dioxin which flows out of incinerators at a very high rate. "Dioxin is formed during industrial processes involving chlorine or when chlorine and organic (carbon-containing matter are burned together," writes Lois Gibbs of the Citizens Clearinghouse for Hazardous Waste. The campaign against the use of chlorine is led by Greenpeace International which has also produced written reports. In addition to dangerous chlorine-related emissions, furans, PCBs, mercury and hydrochloric acid come from incinerators. The most important non-activist report (Great Lakes International Joint Commission) came out in 1992 which called for closing of all Great Lakes region incinerators (DETROIT FREE PRESS, March 31, 1998).
Paul and Ellen Connett of WASTE NOT report how incinerators have made a small comeback in the 1990s (14% of the US waste stream) from 1980 when only 10% of waste was burnt. In 1960 incinerators accounted for 30% of domestic waste. The Connetts comment on the present push for incinerators writing, "In the face of widespread public concern, renewed efforts have been made over the last decade to promote the incineration of domestic waste as a clean technology. However, although the level of certain atmospheric emissions from modern incinerators is much lower than earlier models, the higher combustion temperatures involved can cause the formation of other chemicals - and there is still the residue of toxic ash to dispose of. Furthermore, since these facilities require a constant steam of waste to justify their considerable expense, municipal authorities have no incentive to find ways of minimizing waste." (THE ECOLOGIST, January/February 1994)
Return to Home Page
Return to Action Page